Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Panel considers whether criminal-court findings preclude civil claim in assault/intentional-distress case
Summary
The Appeals Court examined whether facts established in an earlier criminal conviction (absence of justification or excuse) precluded relitigating related issues in a subsequent civil suit for intentional infliction of emotional distress and assault and battery.
The panel considered whether a criminal conviction that resolved the absence of justification or excuse for physical force precluded relitigation of related facts in a follow‑on civil suit seeking damages for assault and battery and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
Michael Jurati, counsel for appellant Michelle Nassif, argued that elements litigated in the earlier criminal proceeding should have precluded relitigation of the same…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
